sf wrote on Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:46:58 -0700:

>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:48:53 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>>
>>>> i've never been tempted to subscribe, but i have gone to
>>>> the library to see what they say about certain items before
>>>> i bought.
>>>>
>>>> i wish they had a free site on the 'net, because i'm cheap.
>>>
>>> They *do* have a free site, but it has very limited
>>> information. A few years back, I was buying a car, and
>>> wanted lots of information. I subscribed to their paid site
>>> for one month, at a cost of US$2.95. I think I got my
>>> money's worth. With a credit card, it took me a few seconds
>>> to subscribe, and at the end of the month, another few
>>> seconds to unsubscribe.
>>
>> yeah, i know about the one-month option.
>>
>> i don't often make big- (or even semi-big) ticket purchases,
>> so i go to the library. they have a couple years' worth of
>> the magazine with an index.
>>
> If you're buying a car, read Edmunds.com.

Consumer Reports has a buying service that will give you the true
dealer's cost on a car and the desired bells and whistles for a small
price. I have never had any trouble paying about $250 over that. In
fact, when I tell salesmen about it being a CR price, they almost
always say that they can match it.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:56:45 GMT, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

>Consumer Reports has a buying service that will give you the true
>dealer's cost on a car and the desired bells and whistles for a small
>price. I have never had any trouble paying about $250 over that. In
>fact, when I tell salesmen about it being a CR price, they almost
>always say that they can match it.

You can get that at Edmund's (invoice, give backs etc - but not the
end of month, end of quarter give backs) and it's free.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote on Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:36:38 -0700:

>> Consumer Reports has a buying service that will give you the
>> true dealer's cost on a car and the desired bells and
>> whistles for a small price. I have never had any trouble
>> paying about $250 over that. In fact, when I tell salesmen
>> about it being a CR price, they almost always say that they
>> can match it.

> You can get that at Edmund's (invoice, give backs etc - but
> not the end of month, end of quarter give backs) and it's
> free.

I did use Edmonds too and I don't think there was much difference. Th
only problem was that the dealer Edmonds recommended did not have the
car I wanted in stock

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"sf" > wrote in message
>>
> If you're buying a car, read Edmunds.com.
>

I used to read them until I read "facts" in a review of a particular model
of car that I owned. There were at least three factual errors. A review
may be subjective as to ride, handling, beauty, but to say it does not have
a particular feature when it does in plain wrong.

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:29:18 GMT, "James Silverton"
> wrote:

>I did use Edmonds too and I don't think there was much difference. Th
>only problem was that the dealer Edmonds recommended did not have the
>car I wanted in stock

You don't "shop" anyway? That's no way to get the best deal.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote on Sat, 27 Jun 2009 14:54:55 -0700:

>> I did use Edmonds too and I don't think there was much
>> difference. Th only problem was that the dealer Edmonds
>> recommended did not have the car I wanted in stock

> You don't "shop" anyway? That's no way to get the best deal.

Duh!

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:43:19 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"sf" > wrote in message
>>>
>> If you're buying a car, read Edmunds.com.
>>
>
>I used to read them until I read "facts" in a review of a particular model
>of car that I owned. There were at least three factual errors. A review
>may be subjective as to ride, handling, beauty, but to say it does not have
>a particular feature when it does in plain wrong.
>
So write a correction.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:43:19 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"sf" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>> If you're buying a car, read Edmunds.com.
>>>
>>
>>I used to read them until I read "facts" in a review of a particular model
>>of car that I owned. There were at least three factual errors. A review
>>may be subjective as to ride, handling, beauty, but to say it does not
>>have
>>a particular feature when it does in plain wrong.
>>
> So write a correction.
>

That's not the point. I knew that information was wrong because I owned that
particular model. If, however, I'm looking for a new car, how do I know the
information is correct? That can be done by going to the manufacturer's web
page to verify everything, but if I have to do that, why not just skip
Edmunds?

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:06:38 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"sf" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:43:19 -0400, "Ed Pawlowski" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"sf" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>> If you're buying a car, read Edmunds.com.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I used to read them until I read "facts" in a review of a particular model
>>>of car that I owned. There were at least three factual errors. A review
>>>may be subjective as to ride, handling, beauty, but to say it does not
>>>have
>>>a particular feature when it does in plain wrong.
>>>
>> So write a correction.
>>
>
>That's not the point. I knew that information was wrong because I owned that
>particular model. If, however, I'm looking for a new car, how do I know the
>information is correct? That can be done by going to the manufacturer's web
>page to verify everything, but if I have to do that, why not just skip
>Edmunds?
>
We've found Edmunds to be informative and reliable. Sorry you found a
problem with it.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
..
>
> Then again, the number one self-appointed expert on food on this
> food
> newsgroup is Sheldon. Just ask him. I don't know about the
> audio
> newsgroups, but I am subscribed to a medical group
> (sci.med.vision), and
> the consensus among the loudest people is that medical people
> know
> nothing about medicine. Only True Science people know anything,
> and no,
> these aren't people with credentials and experience in science,
> they are
> engineers.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>

Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
really ARE experts?

I've been doing 'Q and grilling for over 50 years, and I think I
learn something here almost every day.

As an aside, I think that Engineers have contributed more over the
years than most anybody. I wish I had taken that course of study.
.. . back when.
--
Nonny

.. . . on a darned diet
and ready to chew off
my own elbows.

In article >, "Nonny" >
wrote:

> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
> .
> >
> > Then again, the number one self-appointed expert on food on this
> > food
> > newsgroup is Sheldon. Just ask him. I don't know about the
> > audio
> > newsgroups, but I am subscribed to a medical group
> > (sci.med.vision), and
> > the consensus among the loudest people is that medical people
> > know
> > nothing about medicine. Only True Science people know anything,
> > and no,
> > these aren't people with credentials and experience in science,
> > they are
> > engineers.

> Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
> really ARE experts?

Trust me. I know the signs of senility.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Nonny" >
> wrote:
>
>> Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
>> really ARE experts?
>
> Trust me. I know the signs of senility.
>

LOLOL

Read some of "Nonny's" posts on alt.food.barbeque, Dan. He's the "Expert".
Always futzing with things, and most recently wanting to cook over plutonium
and other such shit. Yeah, Nonny is about as credible as Sheldumb.

Maybe he's related to Andy? After thinking about it for a second, Nonny IS
more like Andy than Sheldumb.

Norman Paperman wrote:
> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >, "Nonny" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
>>> really ARE experts?
>> Trust me. I know the signs of senility.
>>
>
> LOLOL
>
> Read some of "Nonny's" posts on alt.food.barbeque, Dan. He's the "Expert".
> Always futzing with things, and most recently wanting to cook over plutonium
> and other such shit. Yeah, Nonny is about as credible as Sheldumb.
>
> Maybe he's related to Andy? After thinking about it for a second, Nonny IS
> more like Andy than Sheldumb.
>
>
>

I thought the Plutonium thing was pretty funny, all things considered. I
was thinking, you wouldn't have to watch the fire at all. And everyone
here would have something else to argue about aside from water vs. sand,
and the creosote, and the method of laying out the lump for the burn, etc.

But I couldn't agree more on the Shel*** person. Him and one other shall
stay on my permanent plonk list, I don't care how much they are loved.

Bob

Norman Paperman wrote:
> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> In article >, "Nonny" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
>>> really ARE experts?
>>>
>> Trust me. I know the signs of senility.
>>
>>
>
> LOLOL
>
> Read some of "Nonny's" posts on alt.food.barbeque, Dan. He's the "Expert".
> Always futzing with things, and most recently wanting to cook over plutonium
> and other such shit. Yeah, Nonny is about as credible as Sheldumb.
>
> Maybe he's related to Andy? After thinking about it for a second, Nonny IS
> more like Andy than Sheldumb.

You have to keep your eye on Nonny, what he says may sound legit, but he
is just being humorous. He kids, he kids.


Becca

On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:53:47 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:

> Norman Paperman wrote:
>> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >, "Nonny" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Did you ever consider that folks like him and many of the others
>>>> really ARE experts?
>>> Trust me. I know the signs of senility.
>>>
>>
>> LOLOL
>>
>> Read some of "Nonny's" posts on alt.food.barbeque, Dan. He's the "Expert".
>> Always futzing with things, and most recently wanting to cook over plutonium
>> and other such shit. Yeah, Nonny is about as credible as Sheldumb.
>>
>> Maybe he's related to Andy? After thinking about it for a second, Nonny IS
>> more like Andy than Sheldumb.
>>
>
> I thought the Plutonium thing was pretty funny, all things considered. I
> was thinking, you wouldn't have to watch the fire at all. And everyone
> here would have something else to argue about aside from water vs. sand,
> and the creosote, and the method of laying out the lump for the burn, etc.
>
> But I couldn't agree more on the Shel*** person. Him and one other shall
> stay on my permanent plonk list, I don't care how much they are loved.
>
> Bob

sheldon is loved?

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:58:55 -0700, Denny Wheeler wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:23:04 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:53:47 -0400, Bob Muncie wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> But I couldn't agree more on the Shel*** person. Him and one other shall
>>> stay on my permanent plonk list, I don't care how much they are loved.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>
>>sheldon is loved?
>
> By his mother?

only when she gets drunk.

your pal,
blake